BREAKING NEWS:  APPEAL FILED IN HOUSTON RLC BATTLE!  FOLLOW THE VOTERS DECISION!

Special Thanks to www.wrongonred.com for spreading the news!

http://2onthebeat.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/filed-an-appeal-with-the-5th-circuit.pdf

Highlights from Page 15 and Page 16.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

This case concerns the constitutionally guaranteed and statutorily defined right of all Texans in home rule cities to govern themselves by petitioning charter amendment elections under Article I, Section 2 and Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code. The Texas Constitution and that statute grant citizens the right to amend a home rule city’s “constitution,” i.e., its charter. If municipal government by the people, of the people, and for the people is to continue in Houston, this Court should (1) reverse and render Judge Hughes’ denial of Appellants’ intervention motion; (2) void the June 17, 2011 summary judgment for ATS; and (3) remand the case.

Appellants seek to appeal an abridgment of their constitutional and statutory right to campaign for municipal reform by petitioning for charter amendment elections. Appellants (1) timely intervened, (2) proved a concrete and legally cognizable “interest” in defending the Proposition 3 election they petitioned for, funded, and won, (3) demonstrated that their interest in petitioning for, winning, and defending charter-amendment elections is impaired, and (4) showed that the City’s collusive defense of the election and two related ordinances is utterly inadequate. Judge Hughes’ June 17, 2011 interlocutory summary judgment shows the importance of permitting the Kubosh Appellants to intervene on behalf of themselves and 181,000 other City voters who oppose ATS/City cameras.

In his June 17, 2011 memorandum opinion, the district court declared that, “The Founders’ definition of tyranny was arbitrary government. Timid or over-enthusiastic city officials can destroy regular government as easily as a king.” But a far greater danger has arisen because government contractor ATS demands that federal courts disregard a state constitution, judicially restrict the scope of a legislature’s state-wide election laws, overturn the will of the people expressed in a lawful election, abridge the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of citizens to petition entrenched municipal elites to amend or supersede oppressive and outdate ordinances, and exercise jurisdiction over state law issues without certifying those issues to a state supreme court already examining the same state law issues.

Here, the City has lost a case it purports, falsely, to “zealously defend,” enabling it to continue pocketing $10 million in annual Red Light Camera revenues its Mayor does not want to lose. Because the City waived the statutory and constitutional defenses Appellants preserved, no one but Appellants can defend the Proposition 3 election they petitioned for, organized, funded with $200,000 of their family’s money, and won at the polls. Only Appellants can protect their and their fellow citizens’ constitutional and statutory right to reform City government through charter amendment elections. And only the Kubosh Appellants can effectively preserve their right, and their fellow citizens’ right, to appeal an erroneous June 17, 2011 summary judgment in favor of ATS.

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Title
Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Email
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (registered users only)
	Add Comment Preview